PSCI 4505B Transitions to Democracy Monday 11:35-14:25 Please confirm location on Carleton Central

Carleton University Winter 2016 Department of Political Science PSCI 4505B Transitions to Democracy Monday 11:35-14:25 Please confirm location on Carleton Central Instructor: Elizabeth Friesen Office: Loeb B 641 Office Hours: Monday 15:00-16:00 or by appointment Phone: (613) 520-2600 (ext. 3052) (no voicemail) Email: elizabeth.friesen@carleton.ca Course Description: This is a theoretically guided seminar course that aims to provide the foundations to conceptualize and study critically the processes of democratization in a comparative perspective. The course is designed to familiarize students with theoretical approaches to democratization, various paths of political development, and the challenges facing countries in democratic transition and consolidation. The course starts with two fundamental questions, What is democracy? and How can democracy be achieved? It incorporates both theoretical discussion and case studies in order to gain understanding of the nature, timing, causes, opportunities and limitations of the process of democratization. The course is divided into two sections: 1. Theoretical overview: An examination of the state of democratic theory, with reference to the historiography of democratic theory, the process of democratization and the conditions of democracy. 2. Case studies: An examination of the second and third waves of democratization, including examples from Southern Europe, South America, Post-Communist Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and touching on the democratic potential of the international/global sphere. Texts: The following required textbooks have been ordered for purchase at the Carleton University Bookstore: Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Shapiro, Ian, The State of Democratic Theory, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003. All other readings can be accessed from ARES (the library s online reserves). Students are encouraged to purchase the required texts. Course Format: Weekly seminars are held from 11:35 to 14:25. The first class is an introductory session. After that each class will start with a brief introduction by the instructor and a breakdown into small groups for discussion. The questions, comments and themes that come up in the small group discussion will be used to structure the full class discussion. The instructor may introduce different discussion formats and other class activities occasionally to complement the weekly seminar. 1

Evaluation: Students will be evaluated based on their seminar participation, eight reaction papers and one final essay as follows: Due Date Assignment Length Ongoing At the beginning (in advance of class discussion) of eight classes between Week 1 and Week 12 Week 12 April 4 in class Seminar attendance and participation (attendance will be taken in all classes) 8 reaction papers (5% each) Final essay % of Final Mark Ongoing 25% 8 X 1 pg. singlespaced 2000-2500 words 40% 35% Note Attendance: 5% Participation: 20% Be prepared to be called upon in class to share your reaction paper with others. The final essay is a critical thought-piece. Topics will be distributed half-way through the course on February 8. 1) Seminar Attendance and Participation (25%) Attendance: 5% If the student is present on time for the entire class, s/he will receive full marks for attendance. Participation: 20% The course is driven by research and discussion and its success requires the active participation of students. Students should be prepared to be called upon to present their understandings, questions and views concerning the topic and the readings of the class/course. This includes sharing, either in full or in part, their reaction papers in the class. Both quantity and quality of contributions are taken into account. Good quality active participation should reflect the student s knowledge and critical understanding of the readings, their enthusiasm for participating in a seminar and their ability to engage in constructive discussion with other students. It is important to complete all required readings and give them careful thought before coming to class. If the student anticipates that s/he will miss a seminar, or if s/he has missed one, s/he must provide sufficient explanation, preferably by e-mail, otherwise his or her grade will suffer the loss of both attendance and participation grades for the missed class. Sufficient explanation is limited to documented medical conditions and other unavoidable emergencies. 2) Reaction Papers (8 x 5%) Students are required to write eight reaction papers during the course, all of which should be one page single-spaced. Each paper is worth 5% of the final term mark; the eight papers are worth 40% of the final mark. 2

The choice of weeks for which reaction papers are written is at the student s discretion, but the chosen weeks must be between week 2 and week 13 inclusive. This means that there are 12 opportunities to write papers, thus 4 classes can be attended without having written a reaction paper without a loss of marks. It is highly recommended that students complete the reaction papers earlier rather than later in the course. Each paper must be handed in at the beginning of class concerning the readings assigned for that class. Late papers will not be accepted, except in cases of documented medical reasons, family emergencies, etc. Reaction papers are a critical reflection of your reading of the assigned texts in advance of having discussed the texts; they can also be referred to as short thought-pieces or reading responses or mini review-papers. Reaction papers should not be summaries, but critical assessments of the readings. Simply put, reaction papers contain your reactions (thoughts, questions, agreements, disagreements, etc.) to the readings and they are essentially the collection of well thought-out reactions written in an essay style in the wake of having read and critically considered the assigned texts that will be discussed in the class for which the reaction paper was written. It is not required that the reaction papers refer to any text other than the assigned readings for the given class; however, if your reaction raises connections with other assigned or supplementary readings, or even readings that are not assigned for this particular class but fit well with your reaction, you are welcome to communicate them in the paper. Finally, while the reaction paper should always focus on the assigned readings for the given class, it need not focus on all of them equally. Reaction papers, due to their shortness, will generally not be commented upon in great detail individually in writing by the instructor. If the student opts to write a reaction paper for the final class it will be available for pick up during office hours or can be mailed to the student if the student provides a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Note if a student submits fewer reaction papers than the required eight, those missing will be added to the average as zero. 3) Final Essay (35%) The final essay will be a 2000-2500 word critical thought-piece concerning the nature and processes of democratization in accordance with the major sections of the course. The essay topics will be distributed on February 8 (Week 5). Students are expected to make maximum use of course readings. It is encouraged that students incorporate additional sources, although the essay should be grounded in the course readings. Essays will primarily be evaluated on the basis of their coherence, quality of argument, quality of writing, and quality of thought. There is a penalty for late final essays, with exceptions granted only for documented medical reasons and personal emergencies. Each calendar day of lateness will result in the loss of one third of a letter grade, including weekends (1 day of lateness: student will receive B- instead of a 3

B; 2 days of lateness: student will receive a C+ instead of a B; etc.) The graded final papers will be available for pick up during office hours or they can be returned by mail if the student provides a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Paper Submission and Late Paper Policy: All assignments (hard copies) must be submitted to the instructor in class as noted above. Late final essays may be put in the drop box of the Political Science Department (located outside B640 Loeb Building). Please note that the drop box is emptied every weekday at 16:00 and all items collected at that time are date-stamped with that day s date. Essays put in the drop box after 16:00 (4:00 p.m.) are date stamped with the next day s date. Late essays will be penalized as described above. Seminar Topics and Readings: There may be changes in the required readings at the discretion of the instructor. Part I: The State of Democratic Theory Week 1 (January 11): What is Democracy? Introduction in Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press: 1-9. Schmitter, Philippe C. and Terry Lynn Karl. 1991. What Democracy is and is not. Journal of Democracy 2(3): 75-88. Diamond Larry and Leonardo Morlino. 2004. The Quality of Democracy: An Overview. Journal of Democracy 15(4): 20-31. Parekh, Bhikhu. 1992. The Cultural Particularity of Liberal Democracy, Political Studies, 40(Special issue): 160-175. Democracy in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 20-51. Sen, Amartya. 1999. Democracy as a Universal Value. Journal of Democracy 10(3): 3-17. Schumpeter, Joseph. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper: 240-83. Week 2 (January 18) Why Democracy? The Common Good, Deliberation against Domination? and Power and Democratic Competition in Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press: 10-64. McFaul, Michael. 2004. Democracy Promotion as a World Value. The Washington Quarterly 28(1): 147-63. Fukuyama, Francis and Michael McFaul. 2007-2008. Should Democracy Be Promoted or Demoted. The Washington Quarterly 31(1): 23-45. Postscript in Dahl, Robert. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press: 208-227. 4

Week 3 (January 25) Paths to Democracy I Getting and Keeping Democracy in Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press: 78-103. Carothers, Thomas. 2002. The End of the Transition Paradigm, Journal of Democracy 13(1): 5 21. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. Democracy s Third Wave. Journal of Democracy 2(2): 12-34. Explaining Democratization in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:74-104. Berman, Sheri. 2007. Lessons from Europe. Journal of Democracy 18: 28-41. Campbell, Kim and Sean C. Carroll. 2005. Sustaining Democracy s Last Wave. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 6(2): 45-52. Week 4 (February 1) Paths to Democracy II Democracy and Distribution in Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press: 104-145. (May omit 5.1.2, 5.1.3 and 5.2.1 except for last three paragraphs). Levitsky, Steve and Lucan Way. 2002. The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy 13(2): 51-65. Carothers, Thomas. 2009. Democracy Assistance: Political vs. Developmental? Journal of Democracy 20(1): 5-19. Supplemental Myths and Misconceptions about Democracy in Nef, Jorge and Bernd Reiter. 2009. The Democratic Challenge. New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 49-69. Democratization in Historical Perspective in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:52-73. Week 5 (February 8) Getting and Keeping Democracy? Reconsidering the State of Democratic Theory in Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press: 146-152. Zakaria, Fareed. 1997. The Rise of Illiberal Democracy. Foreign Affairs November/December: 22-43. O'Donnell, Guillermo A. 2007. The Perpetual Crises of Democracy. Journal of Democracy 18(1): 5-11. Diamond, Larry. 2008. The Democratic Rollback: The Resurgence of the Predatory State. Foreign Affairs 87(2): 36-48. Glazer, Nathan. 2010. Democracy and Deep Divides. Journal of Democracy 21(2): 5-19. Democracy as an Idea and a Process Nef, Jorge and Bernd Reiter. 2009. The Democratic Challenge. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:12-32. Madison, James. 2003. Federalist Paper 10 in The Federalist edited by Terence Ball, 98-104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.. Reynolds, Andrew. 2005. Constitutional Medicine, Journal of Democracy 16(1): 54-68. 5

No Class February 15 (Study Break February 15-19) Part II: Case Studies Week 6 (February 22) Examples from Southern Europe Democratization in Europe in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:191-224. Southern Europe: concluding Reflections in Linz, Juan J. and Alfred Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post- Communist Europe, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, pp. 139-147. Berman, Sheri. 2012. Warnings from History. Journal of Democracy 23(4): 7-14. Pappas, Takis S. 2013. Why Greece Failed. Journal of Democracy 24(2): 31-45. Berman, Sheri. 2007. Lessons from Europe. Journal of Democracy 18(January): 28-41. Gunther, Richard. 2009. Southern Europe. in Democratization, edited by Christian W. Haerpfer, Patrick Bernhagen, Ronald F. Inglehart, and Christian Welzel, 268-289. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. Democracy s Third Wave. Journal of Democracy 2(2): 12-34. Week 7 (February 29) Examples from South America Democratization in Latin America in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:225-251. From an Impossible to a Possible Democratic Game: Argentina and South America: Concluding Reflections in Linz, Juan J. and Alfred Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, 190-204 and 219-230. O Donnell, Guillermo. 1996. Illusions about Consolidation. Journal of Democracy 7(April): 34-51. O Donnell, Guillermo. 2004. The Quality of Democracy: Why the Rule of Law Matters. Journal of Democracy 15(4): 32-46. Schedler, Andreas. 2001. Measuring Democratic Consolidation. Studies in Comparative International Development 36(1): 66-92. Week 8 (March 7) Examples from Post-Communist Europe Democratization in Europe in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:191-224. Post-Communist Europe: Concluding Reflections in Linz, Juan J. and Alfred Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post- Communist Europe, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, 235-254 and 434-458. Geremek, Bronislaw. 1992. Civil Society Then and Now. Journal of Democracy 3(2): 3-12. 6

Haerpfer, Christian W. 2009. Post-Communist Europe and Post-Soviet Russia. in Democratization, edited by Christian W. Haerpfer, Patrick Bernhagen, Ronald F. Inglehart, and Christian Welzel, 309-320. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pehe, Jiri. 2004. Consolidating Free Government in the New EU. Journal of Democracy 15(1): 36-47. Berman, Sheri. 2012. Warnings from History. Journal of Democracy 23(4): 7-14. McFaul, Michael. 2005. Transitions from Postcommunism. Journal of Democracy 16(3): 5-19. Beissinger, Mark R. 2008. A New Look at Ethnicity and Democratization. Journal of Democracy 19(3):85-97. Week 9 (March 14) Examples from Africa Democratization in Africa in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:252-278. Joseph, Richard. 2003. Africa: States in Crisis. Journal of Democracy, 14(3): 159-170. Gibson, James L. 2006. The contributions of truth to reconciliation: Lessons from South Africa, Journal of Conflict Resolution 50(3): 409-432. Jensen, Nathan and Leonard Wantchekon. 2004. Resource Wealth and Political Regimes in Africa. Comparative Political Studies 37(7): 816-41. Sandbrook, S. 1996. Transitions without Consolidation: Democratization in Six African Cases. Third World Quarterly, 171(1): 69-88. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. Democracy s Third Wave. Journal of Democracy 2(2): 12-34. Week 10 (March 21) Examples from Asia Democratization in Asia in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:308-337. Diamond, Larry. 2012. The Coming Wave, Journal of Democracy 23(1): 5-13. MacKinnon, Rebecca. 2011. China's "Networked Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy 22(2): 32-46. Shin, Doh Chull and Rollin F. Tusalem. 2009. East Asia. in Democratization, edited by Christian W. Haerpfer, Patrick Bernhagen, Ronald F. Inglehart, and Christian Welzel, 357-376. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stepan, Alfred Juan J. Linz, and Yogendra Yadav. 2010. The Rise of State-Nations. Journal of Democracy 21(3): 50-68. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. Democracy s Third Wave. Journal of Democracy 2(2): 12-34. Week 11 (March 28) Examples from the Middle East Democratization in the Middle East in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 279-307. 7

Stepan,Alfred Juan J. Linz. 2013. Democratization Theory and the Arab Spring. Journal of Democracy 24(April): 15-30. Barany, Zoltan. 2011. The Role of the Military. Journal of Democracy 22(4): 24-35. Kurth, James. 2005. Ignoring History: US Democratization in the Muslim World. Orbis 49(2): 305-22. Lust, Ellen. 2009. Competitive Clientelism in the Middle East. Journal of Democracy 20(3): 122-135. Berman, Sheri. 2007. Lessons from Europe. Journal of Democracy 18(January): 28-41. Week 12 (April 4) The Future of Democratization Note: Final Essay due in class Conclusion in Grugel, Jean and Matthew Louis Bishop, 2014. Democratization a Critical Introduction, Second edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan:338-351. Dahl, Robert A. 1999. The Shifting Boundaries of Democratic Governments. Social Research 66(3): 915-31. Della Porta, Donatella. 2005. Globalizations and Democracy. Democratization 12(5): 668-685. Morozov, Evgeny. 2011. Whither Internet Control? Journal of Democracy 22(2): 62-74. Gershman, Carl and Michael Allen. 2006. The Assault on Democracy Assistance, Journal of Democracy 17(2): 36-51. Tsoukalis, Loukas. 2012. Markets, Institutions, and Legitimacy. Journal of Democracy 23(4): 47-53. Whitehead, Laurence. 2010. The Crash of '08. Journal of Democracy 21(1): 45-56. Academic Accommodations The Paul Menton Centre for Students with Disabilities (PMC) provides services to students with Learning Disabilities (LD), psychiatric/mental health disabilities, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), chronic medical conditions, and impairments in mobility, hearing, and vision. If you have a disability requiring academic accommodations in this course, please contact PMC at 613-520-6608 or pmc@carleton.ca for a formal evaluation. If you are already registered with the PMC, contact your PMC coordinator to send me your Letter of Accommodation at the beginning of the term, and no later than two weeks before the first in-class scheduled test or exam requiring accommodation (if applicable). After requesting accommodation from PMC, meet with me to ensure accommodation arrangements are made. Please consult the PMC website for the deadline to request accommodations for the formally-scheduled exam (if applicable). For Religious Observance: Students requesting accommodation for religious observances should apply in writing to their instructor for alternate dates and/or means of satisfying academic requirements. Such requests should be made during the first two weeks of class, or as soon as possible after the need for accommodation is known to exist, but no later than two weeks before the compulsory academic event. Accommodation is to be worked out directly and on an individual basis between the student and the instructor(s) involved. Instructors will make 8

accommodations in a way that avoids academic disadvantage to the student. Instructors and students may contact an Equity Services Advisor for assistance (www.carleton.ca/equity). For Pregnancy: Pregnant students requiring academic accommodations are encouraged to contact an Equity Advisor in Equity Services to complete a letter of accommodation. Then, make an appointment to discuss your needs with the instructor at least two weeks prior to the first academic event in which it is anticipated the accommodation will be required. Plagiarism: The University Senate defines plagiarism as presenting, whether intentional or not, the ideas, expression of ideas or work of others as one s own. This can include: reproducing or paraphrasing portions of someone else s published or unpublished material, regardless of the source, and presenting these as one s own without proper citation or reference to the original source; submitting a take-home examination, essay, laboratory report or other assignment written, in whole or in part, by someone else; using ideas or direct, verbatim quotations, or paraphrased material, concepts, or ideas without appropriate acknowledgment in any academic assignment; using another s data or research findings; failing to acknowledge sources through the use of proper citations when using another s works and/or failing to use quotation marks; handing in "substantially the same piece of work for academic credit more than once without prior written permission of the course instructor in which the submission occurs. Plagiarism is a serious offence which cannot be resolved directly with the course s instructor. The Associate Deans of the Faculty conduct a rigorous investigation, including an interview with the student, when an instructor suspects a piece of work has been plagiarized. Penalties are not trivial. They may include a mark of zero for the plagiarized work or a final grade of "F" for the course. Student or professor materials created for this course (including presentations and posted notes, labs, case studies, assignments and exams) remain the intellectual property of the author(s). They are intended for personal use and may not be reproduced or redistributed without prior written consent of the author(s). Submission and Return of Term Work: Papers must be submitted directly to the instructor according to the instructions in the course outline and will not be date-stamped in the departmental office. Late assignments may be submitted to the drop box in the corridor outside B640 Loeb. Assignments will be retrieved every business day at 4 p.m., stamped with that day's date, and then distributed to the instructor. For essays not returned in class please attach a stamped, self-addressed envelope if you wish to have your assignment returned by mail. Final exams are intended solely for the purpose of evaluation and will not be returned. Grading: Standing in a course is determined by the course instructor, subject to the approval of the faculty Dean. Final standing in courses will be shown by alphabetical grades. The system of grades used, with corresponding grade points is: Percentage Letter grade 12-point scale Percentage Letter grade 12-point scale 90-100 A+ 12 67-69 C+ 6 85-89 A 11 63-66 C 5 9

80-84 A- 10 60-62 C- 4 77-79 B+ 9 57-59 D+ 3 73-76 B 8 53-56 D 2 70-72 B- 7 50-52 D- 1 Approval of final grades: Standing in a course is determined by the course instructor subject to the approval of the Faculty Dean. This means that grades submitted by an instructor may be subject to revision. No grades are final until they have been approved by the Dean. Carleton E-mail Accounts: All email communication to students from the Department of Political Science will be via official Carleton university e-mail accounts and/or culearn. As important course and University information is distributed this way, it is the student s responsibility to monitor their Carleton and culearn accounts. Carleton Political Science Society: The Carleton Political Science Society (CPSS) has made its mission to provide a social environment for politically inclined students and faculty. Holding social events, debates, and panel discussions, CPSS aims to involve all political science students at Carleton University. Our mandate is to arrange social and academic activities in order to instill a sense of belonging within the Department and the larger University community. Members can benefit through numerous opportunities which will complement both academic and social life at Carleton University. To find out more, visit https://www.facebook.com/groups/politicalsciencesociety/ or come to our office in Loeb D688. Official Course Outline: The course outline posted to the Political Science website is the official course outline. 10